Lower-income workers are set to be the biggest losers under new government proposals to delay the introduction of a pivotal pension scheme.

The personal account was due to roll out in 2012 with the aim of boosting retirement income for millions of lower-income savers.

But plans unveiled by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to stagger the introduction of the scheme will push back the start date for contributions by employers and the government by up to four years.

Advisers warn the delay will dent savings, while the plan to sign up large employers before smaller companies will hit those most likely to have no access to a workplace pension scheme.

The scheme originally aimed to automatically enrol all employees not in a work retirement scheme into a personal account in 2012, although it is possible to opt out immediately.

The idea is to make indifferent or lazy staff save into a pension by default and it is still hoped up to 9m workers will benefit. Employees would contribute 4% of their salary, their employers 3% and the taxman a further 1% on any pay between roughly £5,200 and £35,000; contributions will be annually capped at £3,600.

However, employers will now only need to put in a minimum of 1% of a worker's salary into a pension from October 2012, rising to 2% in 2015 and 3% from October 2016.

Employees' contributions will also be staged, and the 5% minimum, including tax relief, will only be required from 2016. The DWP says the staggered delay will allow it to set up the scheme more smoothly. "We've ... concluded that a 36-month staging period strikes the right balance between getting people into saving as quickly as possible, and minimising the operational risks associated with the reforms," says a DWP spokesman.

Its consultation paper notes a "disproportionate burden on small and micro employers who would contribute for longer than large employers", and so suggests it will "start with the largest employers and end with the smallest".

But Steve Bee, head of pensions strategy for Scottish Life, warns the delays create a danger of leaving lower-income earners worse off.

"The last employers to be required by law to implement workplace pension schemes will be those who don't have them - thereby losing out on cash - and by and large never did have them, while those going first will be those who, by and large, already have them and always have done," he says.

Personal accounts emerged from a wholesale review of the UK's pension system by Lord Turner in 2005. The Conservatives say they will "review" the topic if they win the next election.

The accounts were touted as a way to help lower- to middle-income Britons - who tend not to build much of a private pension - provide for their retirement instead of relying on benefits and pension credit, alongside stretching the state pension retirement age.

Four years on, they continue to attract huge controversy from consumer groups and charities and large parts of the industry. Gripes include the size of fund fees - a target of 0.5% is proposed - and fears that existing, more generous schemes will be watered down to match the government's suggested 3% contribution from the employer.

However, the most critical concern is the issue of means-testing, and the impact of the scheme on those who receive benefits. Fears remain that low-income savers - those most in need of help - could be left worse off by the semi-compulsory scheme after means-testing, losing vital benefits.

In many cases, the lowest earners would be better off spending the money and relying on benefits and pension credits in retirement "There's a very real risk some savers will lose out, most likely those who can least afford to be worse off," says Matt Brunwin, pensions adviser at IFA Bestinvest.

As it stands, a DWP report in February this year suggested 95% of workers would be better off in the scheme, and that more than three-quarters would more than double their contributions.

Yet that still leaves one in 20 likely to face being worse off in spite of putting aside a chunk of their salary over their working life.

"Many pension savers will run the risk of building up poor-value savings, but will only know that for sure once they reach retirement. This is in no way fair," adds Bee.

As an alternative, he suggests people who reach retirement age only to discover their personal account pension savings have been devalued by means-testing should be able to get their money back, with the tax benefits taken off.

Figuring it out

Anyone unsure of starting a pension or considering holding off their retirement saving until the government has sorted out personal accounts should think again, says Bestinvest pensions adviser Matt Brunwin.

"Do not under any circumstance wait for the government to show initiative," he says. "The onus is on you to take control of your pension saving, regardless of whether it's a company scheme, personal pension or a self-invested personal pension."

In a nutshell, this involves working out the answers to three vital questions: when do you want to retire? How much income do you want in retirement? How do you plan to save enough to get there?

A pensions calculator is a useful tool to start working out how much you might need to save.